If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Am I the only one finding it odd some of the posters that are hitching their wagon to Gabbard?

Has Ron Paul looked closely at her or is he changing a number of positions ?

What I find odd is that your asking a question clearly explained in the first 20 seconds of the video.

There are no perfect candidates. Even Dr. Paul isnt perfect. Going back to the gold standard is financial suicide at this point. He also has millions in gold investments which could call into question his motives for pumping gold. On the other hand it would be hypocritical to tell people to invest in gold if he didnt himself.

That is the Supreme Court's current position. What I cant understand is how right to privacy of your body applies to Abortion only. How is it "your body your choice" for abortion, but "your body, governments choice" for everything else.

That is the Supreme Court's current position. What I cant understand is how right to privacy of your body applies to Abortion only. How is it "your body your choice" for abortion, but "your body, governments choice" for everything else.

Because he feels that the fetus is also an individual with rights to be respected?

To me the abortion debate is pretty simple to understand, the difficulty is in reconciling the views. I think most reasonable would say that at some point between conception and a crying baby, a being has been created and is entitled to the same rights as all of us. When you think that moment occurs is going to dictate your view and I don’t know if it’s a question that can ever be solved.

Because he feels that the fetus is also an individual with rights to be respected?

To me the abortion debate is pretty simple to understand, the difficulty is in reconciling the views. I think most reasonable would say that at some point between conception and a crying baby, a being has been created and is entitled to the same rights as all of us. When you think that moment occurs is going to dictate your view and I don’t know if it’s a question that can ever be solved.

Because he feels that the fetus is also an individual with rights to be respected?

To me the abortion debate is pretty simple to understand, the difficulty is in reconciling the views. I think most reasonable would say that at some point between conception and a crying baby, a being has been created and is entitled to the same rights as all of us. When you think that moment occurs is going to dictate your view and I don’t know if it’s a question that can ever be solved.

Yeah. I think that's how most people see it.

There are some at either end of the spectrum. Those who believe a fetus should have full legal rights at conception and those who believe it has none until birth. Neither position is a serious tenable one from the perspective of working out a reasonable policy. But those positions make for great foils.

Last edited by nsacpi; 05-15-2019 at 02:23 PM.

“It's a shame the White House has become an adult day care center. Someone obviously missed their shift this morning.” Senator Bob Corker